09-04-2026, 07:53 AM
(This post was last modified: 09-04-2026, 08:02 AM by 008348dc760f858fd668476b75fb6f.
Edit Reason: add link
)
(05-04-2026, 12:38 PM)nablator wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.(05-04-2026, 10:35 AM)008348dc760f858fd668476b75fb6f wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.If any folio were to contain a readable text then it would be f1r, it behaves quite differently to the rest of the MS.
Hi,
Why do you think that You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. "behaves quite differently"? It is damaged so some words are a bit difficult to make out but it has enough vocabulary in common with other pages to not really stand out. Many pages have less vocabulary in common with any other page (in % of the total) than f1r.
(08-04-2026, 06:17 PM)nablator wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.Artificial stupidity always assumes first, unless prompted otherwise, and because it is too lazy to try much different mappings, that the EVA alphabet and its ligatures (ch, sh, cth, etc.) are phonetic and basically correct.
(08-04-2026, 05:58 PM)008348dc760f858fd668476b75fb6f wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.Code:Glyph Phoneme ───── ─────── d /d/ r /r/ l /l/ k /k/ q /q/ m /m/ s /s/ t /tˤ/ f /f/ n /n/ a /a, aː/ c /k/ ch /ħ, x/ sh /ʃ/ cth /θ/ i /iː/
I don't necessarily disagree, I work with ML everyday at work so I'm pretty used to the cycle of planning, context setting, verification through falsification. I guess I would posit that this "decoding" is a side product of a more comprehensive line of work regarding the rest of the manuscript. There's a messy play-by-play of that process on my blog, but again it's messy and not community ready. I think I can fairly convincingly demonstrate "readability" of the VMS under the context of a pharmacological reference document in the vein of the Kitab al-Azmina and I hope to have that with the community in the next few days. The You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. reading is a side quest, it's a request to the community for falsification while I also work with Arabic scholars to do the same. As stated in my previous response so far the response is hardly affirmative, and that's ok, a negated theory is one thing ticked off the list.
P.s a more in depth explanation of the reference pharma text interpretation is here => You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.